State v. James S. Riedel, 2003 WI App 18, PFR filed 1/27/03
For Riedel: Ralph A. Kalal
¶8. At the outset, we reject the State’s threshold argument that Riedel is precluded from challenging the trial court’s suppression ruling based on Riedel’s conviction on the OWI charge and the dismissal of the PAC charge. The State reasons that Riedel’s appeal lacks a justiciable controversy because he has failed to argue that he would not have pled to the OWI charge if the trial court had granted the suppression motion or that the OWI evidence would have been insufficient absent the blood test results. We reject the State’s argument. In pleading to the OWI charge, Riedel undoubtedly considered all incriminating evidence against him, including the blood test results.
Though unmentioned by the holding, § 971.31(10), undoubtedly preserves this suppression motion. Keep in mind, though, that this statutory exception to the guilty-plea waiver rule is limited to criminal cases. County of Ozaukee v. Quelle, 198 Wis. 2d 269, 542 N.W.2d 196 (Ct. App. 1995). The lower court case # for Riedel bears a “CT” designation — “Criminal Traffic” — and therefore seems to fulfill this requirement.